Back to Blog
CAFC-DCTApril 29, 2026·25-1854·Dismissed.

VB Assets, LLC v. Amazon.com Services LLC

District Court

Holding

The Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal and cross-appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b) on the parties' agreement, with each side bearing its own costs. The order does not address the merits.

Why It Matters

The parties ended the cross-appeals by agreement, so the order offers no substantive guidance, and the underlying district court rulings are not reviewed in it.

Full Summary

VB Assets, LLC v. Amazon.com Services LLC The Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal and cross-appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b) on the parties' agreement, with each side bearing its own costs. The order does not address the merits. The parties ended the cross-appeals by agreement, so the order offers no substantive guidance, and the underlying district court rulings are not reviewed in it. Dismissed. Appeals Nos. 2025-1854 and 2025-1855 were cross-appeals from the District of Delaware (No. 1:19-cv-01410-MN, Judge Noreika), with VB Assets as plaintiff-cross-appellant and Amazon.com Services as defendant-appellant. The parties agreed to dismissal, and the court dismissed the proceedings under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). Each side bears its own costs. The order was issued as a mandate on April 29, 2026. The order does not identify the patents, the technology, the issues on appeal, or the reason for the agreement, and it gives no merits analysis. standing / jurisdiction non-precedential

Key Points

  • Appeals Nos. 2025-1854 and 2025-1855 were cross-appeals from the District of Delaware (No. 1:19-cv-01410-MN, Judge Noreika), with VB Assets as plaintiff-cross-appellant and Amazon.com Services as defendant-appellant.
  • The parties agreed to dismissal, and the court dismissed the proceedings under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b).
  • Each side bears its own costs.
  • The order was issued as a mandate on April 29, 2026.
  • The order does not identify the patents, the technology, the issues on appeal, or the reason for the agreement, and it gives no merits analysis.
standing / jurisdictionnon-precedential
Read Full Opinion

How this summary was made: Drafted with AI from the court's opinion or order; before publishing, code checked that the quotation and the citations it gives appear in that document. Editorial policy

More on this topic

New to District court litigation? Start with PTAB vs. District Court: Where to Challenge a Patent’s Validity